54 



On Draining. 



tlie smaller than in the larger pipe, bv more than the mere differ- 

 ence of diameter. 



But with respect to the auxiliary drains the case is altered. 

 There I have no misgiving as to the inch-pipes : they have a less 

 mass of soil to relieve, and necessarily a shorter course to run, 

 being limited by the intervals between the deeper ; and if by 

 accident any stoppage should occur, there is no comparison 

 between the two cases in respect of the labour and difficulty of a 

 remedy. In all that length of drain, therefore, in which a 2-feet 

 depth can be substituted for a 4-feet, the difference in cost 

 between the 1-inch pipe and the 2 -inch can be safely spared. 



Now these are material compensations in the question of cost. 

 When I first projected the plan of which I have been speaking, 

 I had great apprehensions on this vital part of the subject. It 

 was obvious that it could not be executed without an additional 

 extent of linear cutting, and I had great fears that I should not 

 be able to bring it within the moderate limits which are the neces- 

 sary condition of practical success ; but upon closer examina- 

 tion the difficulty shrunk into much narrower dimensions. In 

 ground which it is possible to dry by simple deep drains at 

 wide intervals, the object may no doubt be rather more cheaply 

 attained ; but then such ground needs no farther aid. Wherever, 

 on the other hand, deep drains alone would be imperfectly 

 efficient unless at narrow distances, the compensations I have 

 above explained have enabled me even to reduce my outlay to a 

 lower point than would have been necessary to secure it under 

 such a system. 



In my district I have always thought that if I could bring the 

 expense of my draining operations within hi. an acre I might be 

 fairly satisfied, and, I believe, my tenants too ; for that there is 

 little, if any, stiff land converted from wet to dry which will not 

 largely repay such expenditure. My readers, however, will pro- 

 bably, for the most part, exclaim that I am extravagant in my 

 scale, and that the work may be, and ought to be, done much 

 more cheaply ; you, yourself, have given us such details and esti- 

 mates of cheap draining that I fear you will be one of this class 

 of critics. There may be some few points perhaps in which my 

 established operations might be capable of still stricter economy, 

 which has been unattained from accidental circumstances ; but 

 the main clue to the difference of cost is the difference in the 

 price of labour. Throughout the greater part of the agricultural 

 districts from 85. to IO5. per week have been considered good aver- 

 age wages, and would now probably be somewhat above the 

 usual mark. Here, however, a good labourer until lately could 

 command 14^, and even now can obtain I2s. This then is a car- 

 dinal difference. The remuneration of piece-work must of course 



